Your Opinions On Jesus?

[Neon Genesis]

Here's the weird thing though, I did a look into the Greek words, and the combination ego eimi is used several other times in the NT, like Mat 3:11, so the phrasing in itself "I AM" isn't unique, and not used that time only, but in the other cases there were no rocks picked up to throw at him.

 

I suspect that the first quote is really about the idea that someone could have a soul even before they were born. In other words, the idea that a soul wasn't created in the womb, but from eternity to eternity, could have been a heresy to the scribes, because it would give you similar qualities as God, but not necessarily would it mean that you would have to be God. (Just some thoughts)

I've also heard an alternate explanation about the "Us" in Genesis that it isn't referring to the Trinity, but it's referring to this idea that the Jews believed in multiple gods yet worshiped only one of those gods above all the others, and that's why Yahweh told the Jews he was their god and to worship only him when they were given the Ten Commandments. One thing I was always confused about was that if the "Us" in Genesis is referring to the Trinity, wouldn't the Jews have been confused for all those years before Jesus came along as to what the "Us" meant? I asked a Catholic friend of mine who claimed the "Us" meant the Trinity about that, but she claimed the Jews believed in the Holy Spirit. Is it true that they did? I just can't seem to recall any references to the Holy Spirit in the OT unless I'm just misremembering.

[Spiderwire]

I still don't think "Emmanuel" is a word the defines Jesus as God, since Immanuel was a declared in the old testament for the nation of Israel.

 

You're probably right. I was leaning on what I'd been taught rather than what may actually be. Like I said, I'm certainly not a Bible scholar. And I agree with you about Paul thinking that today's Bible would be laughable to him. He was pretty egotistical, but I think even he'd be saying, "THEY WERE JUST LETTERS I WROTE!!!" Maybe not. He'd probably be filthy rich and it's certain that he'd be more popular than Falwell, Hinn, and Graham put together. Hell, Paul and Jan might even have him on the show!

[Franciscan Monkey]

When I was a Christian, I definitely thought that Jesus was part of the triune God. This was mostly based on John 1. I forced the other passages in the NT that seemed to lean the other way into that mold. The great thing about being a non-believer is that such biblical contradictions make sense when you look at the Bible as being written by regular men instead of an infallible God. There is no need to explain why the picture of Jesus as portrayed in John and Revelation "really" matches the picture of Jesus in the rest of the Bible, when it so obviously does not.

 

Respectfully,

Franciscan Monkey

[Abiyoyo]

That's not true at all. There are several scriptural references to Jesus calling himself God. By the way, every hear of the name Emmanuel?

It's such a long time ago I read the Bible, so I don't remember. Do you know which verse?

 

Emmanuel means something like "God with us", if I recall correctly, and doesn't really point to a father-son relationship.

 

This might be a long post. Read it if you like. I'm certainly not claiming to be a Bible scholar, but I can read. The first example I'll use is from John 10: 22-38

 

Scripturally, you are on the money especially if this is directed toward the notion that Jesus was God. But, what I wondered about is the notion that Jesus was not actually God, but every humanly function thought in all was "the Holy Spirit" doing it, even speaking. Jesus also said that the Holy Spirit will give you the words to say. Example, Jesus said He is not of this world, and that they couldn't understand them. They couldn't understand Him because Jesus role from God was for them to not understand. God's will.

 

So. I looked at all the scripture you provided, but I looked at it as; Is it possible that this was the Holy Spirit speaking to these people through Jesus, and not Jesus, the son of Joseph.

[Abiyoyo]

Here's the weird thing though, I did a look into the Greek words, and the combination ego eimi is used several other times in the NT, like Mat 3:11, so the phrasing in itself "I AM" isn't unique, and not used that time only, but in the other cases there were no rocks picked up to throw at him.

 

I suspect that the first quote is really about the idea that someone could have a soul even before they were born. In other words, the idea that a soul wasn't created in the womb, but from eternity to eternity, could have been a heresy to the scribes, because it would give you similar qualities as God, but not necessarily would it mean that you would have to be God. (Just some thoughts)

 

I've also heard an alternate explanation about the "Us" in Genesis that it isn't referring to the Trinity, but it's referring to this idea that the Jews believed in multiple gods yet worshiped only one of those gods above all the others, and that's why Yahweh told the Jews he was their god and to worship only him when they were given the Ten Commandments. One thing I was always confused about was that if the "Us" in Genesis is referring to the Trinity, wouldn't the Jews have been confused for all those years before Jesus came along as to what the "Us" meant? I asked a Catholic friend of mine who claimed the "Us" meant the Trinity about that, but she claimed the Jews believed in the Holy Spirit. Is it true that they did? I just can't seem to recall any references to the Holy Spirit in the OT unless I'm just misremembering.

 

We are on the same page with that Neon Genesis. The Holy Spirit is mentioned in the OT, Saul, Samuel, Elijah, Elisha. The "Us" in Genesis has two problems for me personally.

1. Who heard Us talking?

2.I see it more of the handed down, gap filling heritage writing without any other Biblical support, stand alone material. Theres only a few more times that this type of 'framing' of divinity occurred in the OT.

[Spiderwire]

Scripturally, you are on the money especially if this is directed toward the notion that Jesus was God. But, what I wondered about is the notion that Jesus was not actually God, but every humanly function thought in all was "the Holy Spirit" doing it, even speaking. Jesus also said that the Holy Spirit will give you the words to say. Example, Jesus said He is not of this world, and that they couldn't understand them. They couldn't understand Him because Jesus role from God was for them to not understand. God's will.

 

So. I looked at all the scripture you provided, but I looked at it as; Is it possible that this was the Holy Spirit speaking to these people through Jesus, and not Jesus, the son of Joseph.

 

This might be the case, but there are no allusions to the Holy Spirit at all in any of these instances. If the author(s) would have wanted to imply that, there would have been something there in reference to the Holy Spirit. There are plenty of examples in the scriptures about the Holy Spirit doing this or that or coming upon someone or what have you. But in these instances, it's very plain what's happening and very evident who's speaking and what the context of everything is.

 

If it's your personal belief or opinion concerning the Holy Spirit running the show there, I'd have to say you're more than welcome to it. God may be speaking to you or revealing some great spiritual truth to you, ya know? But wouldn't suggesting this diminish who Jesus was according to scripture? Wouldn't it also insinuate that he was some kind of a weird "puppet" that God could just order about or throw his voice into? I don't think that's what the scriptures are saying. But I'm not defending anything about the scriptures because I think they're fabricated from the get-go and have been modified by whomever for their own purposes since back in the day.

[Evolution_beyond]

I used to believe Jesus was God.

 

Then later I realised that Jesus himself never said that, and even spoke words that conflict with the idea. But I think you'll find that Paul says something in Colossians that indicates that Jesus = God.

 

The Bible contradicts itself on this one though. Which led to all kinds of theological disputes and problems among early christians. Constantine and The Council of Nicaea put the seal on the 'orthodox' interpretation - from then on all the 'heretics' could be persecuted.

 

Erm... the 'orthodox' interpretation says that Jesus is 'fully human' and 'fully divine' and that he is one part of the trinity, which are three separate entities (ie. Jesus and Holy Spirit are not the same as God the Father) that are also somehow one (ie. Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one and the same as God the Father).

 

Clear as mud really.

[Hineni]

At the beginning of my "walk", yes I did believe that Jesus was God. Later, after reading and much study, I found myself believing just the opposite. During that time of belief I became a messianic, and had distanced myself from mainstream christianity. I really didn't even want to be labled a christian at that time.

[Abiyoyo]

I used to believe Jesus was God.

 

Then later I realised that Jesus himself never said that, and even spoke words that conflict with the idea. But I think you'll find that Paul says something in Colossians that indicates that Jesus = God.

 

The Bible contradicts itself on this one though. Which led to all kinds of theological disputes and problems among early christians. Constantine and The Council of Nicaea put the seal on the 'orthodox' interpretation - from then on all the 'heretics' could be persecuted.

 

Erm... the 'orthodox' interpretation says that Jesus is 'fully human' and 'fully divine' and that he is one part of the trinity, which are three separate entities (ie. Jesus and Holy Spirit are not the same as God the Father) that are also somehow one (ie. Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one and the same as God the Father).

 

Clear as mud really.

 

Hmm... Theology. Religion. Church. Mess. I can honestly, for me, say that Christ was everything God said He was suppose to be, He did miracles, etc. He was over filled with God's Spirit. I do think He was the one at that time that God used to reach His people in an ever changing way. Maybe the trinity is right. The Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. But, We are suppose to worship in spirit, because God is a spirit. We take communion in remembrance of Christ.

 

I guess I'm stuck on the notion that Jesus is All, and even Jesus said He, is not. He said He would bring our petitions to the Father, He would be our defense in the end judgment.

But yet, in church today. Jesus is God, and any other, is blasphemy. Crazy

 

My inspiration for this topic is Isaiah

 

 

Isa 46:3-13

3 Hearken unto me, O house of Jacob, and all the remnant of the house of Israel, which are borne by me from the belly, which are carried from the womb:

4 And even to your old age I am he; and even to hoar hairs will I carry you: I have made, and I will bear; even I will carry, and will deliver you.

5 To whom will ye liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be like?

6 They lavish gold out of the bag, and weigh silver in the balance, and hire a goldsmith; and he maketh it a god: they fall down, yea, they worship.

7 They bear him upon the shoulder, they carry him, and set him in his place, and he standeth; from his place shall he not remove: yea, one shall cry unto him, yet can he not answer, nor save him out of his trouble.

8 Remember this, and shew yourselves men: bring it again to mind, O ye transgressors.

9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,

10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

11 Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.

12 Hearken unto me, ye stouthearted, that are far from righteousness:

13 I bring near my righteousness; it shall not be far off, and my salvation shall not tarry: and I will place salvation in Zion for Israel my glory.

(KJV)

[florduh]

For the ten-thousandth time . . .

 

If there was an almighty god who wrote a book for his very own creations, WOULDN'T IT MAKE A LITTLE MORE SENSE AND NOT BE SO GODDAM SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND VAGUE?????

 

Sorry, sometimes my mind just gets boggled by the idiocy.

[Ouroboros]

For the ten-thousandth time . . .

 

If there was an almighty god who wrote a book for his very own creations, WOULDN'T IT MAKE A LITTLE MORE SENSE AND NOT BE SO GODDAM SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND VAGUE?????

 

Sorry, sometimes my mind just gets boggled by the idiocy.

Amen!

 

You would expect a bit more from a "Universe Creator".

[Ouroboros]

I've also heard an alternate explanation about the "Us" in Genesis that it isn't referring to the Trinity, but it's referring to this idea that the Jews believed in multiple gods yet worshiped only one of those gods above all the others, and that's why Yahweh told the Jews he was their god and to worship only him when they were given the Ten Commandments. One thing I was always confused about was that if the "Us" in Genesis is referring to the Trinity, wouldn't the Jews have been confused for all those years before Jesus came along as to what the "Us" meant? I asked a Catholic friend of mine who claimed the "Us" meant the Trinity about that, but she claimed the Jews believed in the Holy Spirit. Is it true that they did? I just can't seem to recall any references to the Holy Spirit in the OT unless I'm just misremembering.

Look into something called Ugarit, and you'll get an eye-opener. It contains a more complete set of gods from the Bible.

 

 

You're probably right. I was leaning on what I'd been taught rather than what may actually be. Like I said, I'm certainly not a Bible scholar. And I agree with you about Paul thinking that today's Bible would be laughable to him. He was pretty egotistical, but I think even he'd be saying, "THEY WERE JUST LETTERS I WROTE!!!" Maybe not. He'd probably be filthy rich and it's certain that he'd be more popular than Falwell, Hinn, and Graham put together. Hell, Paul and Jan might even have him on the show!

It's very easy to understand that the Bible contains a bunch of personal ideas, opinions and human thoughts, if one just look at how preachers, teachers, authors, and idea-makers do it today. It's about fame, money, prestige, and most definitely about pride. And the same rules (same kind of humans) applied back then. It's so strange that people can (and I was one of them!) take a book for granted, and accept it is a true "revelation" of supernatural things, while we reject close to 100% of what people write today! The double-standard-o'meter goes to red-zone and max out!

[Abiyoyo]

For the ten-thousandth time . . .

 

If there was an almighty god who wrote a book for his very own creations, WOULDN'T IT MAKE A LITTLE MORE SENSE AND NOT BE SO GODDAM SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND VAGUE?????

 

Sorry, sometimes my mind just gets boggled by the idiocy.

 

I say no. Question?

If God made himself known to about 2/3 of the earth right now; how many people do you guess would still be 100% firm in His belief 5000yrs later?

I think if for 1000-2000 yrs later, no God; people would be like they were at the time of Christ, not looking. Its not about Him, its about us. Thats why I think the Book exists the way it is.

[Neon Genesis]

I say no. Question?

If God made himself known to about 2/3 of the earth right now; how many people do you guess would still be 100% firm in His belief 5000yrs later?

I think if for 1000-2000 yrs later, no God; people would be like they were at the time of Christ, not looking. Its not about Him, its about us. Thats why I think the Book exists the way it is.

And you fucking know what 2/3 of the Earth think and would react because how? What, are you fucking god now and have this omniscience to know what everyone thinks before you've asked them?

[Abiyoyo]

I've also heard an alternate explanation about the "Us" in Genesis that it isn't referring to the Trinity, but it's referring to this idea that the Jews believed in multiple gods yet worshiped only one of those gods above all the others, and that's why Yahweh told the Jews he was their god and to worship only him when they were given the Ten Commandments. One thing I was always confused about was that if the "Us" in Genesis is referring to the Trinity, wouldn't the Jews have been confused for all those years before Jesus came along as to what the "Us" meant? I asked a Catholic friend of mine who claimed the "Us" meant the Trinity about that, but she claimed the Jews believed in the Holy Spirit. Is it true that they did? I just can't seem to recall any references to the Holy Spirit in the OT unless I'm just misremembering.

Look into something called Ugarit, and you'll get an eye-opener. It contains a more complete set of gods from the Bible.

 

 

You're probably right. I was leaning on what I'd been taught rather than what may actually be. Like I said, I'm certainly not a Bible scholar. And I agree with you about Paul thinking that today's Bible would be laughable to him. He was pretty egotistical, but I think even he'd be saying, "THEY WERE JUST LETTERS I WROTE!!!" Maybe not. He'd probably be filthy rich and it's certain that he'd be more popular than Falwell, Hinn, and Graham put together. Hell, Paul and Jan might even have him on the show!

It's very easy to understand that the Bible contains a bunch of personal ideas, opinions and human thoughts, if one just look at how preachers, teachers, authors, and idea-makers do it today. It's about fame, money, prestige, and most definitely about pride. And the same rules (same kind of humans) applied back then. It's so strange that people can (and I was one of them!) take a book for granted, and accept it is a true "revelation" of supernatural things, while we reject close to 100% of what people write today! The double-standard-o'meter goes to red-zone and max out!

 

Hans. I don't agree with that. I think in no way, the Bible is existent because of fame, money, prestige, or pride. Maybe today, most; but I hardly think then. Correct me if theres anything Biblically that would say I'm wrong.

[Abiyoyo]

I say no. Question?

If God made himself known to about 2/3 of the earth right now; how many people do you guess would still be 100% firm in His belief 5000yrs later?

I think if for 1000-2000 yrs later, no God; people would be like they were at the time of Christ, not looking. Its not about Him, its about us. Thats why I think the Book exists the way it is.

And you fucking know what 2/3 of the Earth think and would react because how? What, are you fucking god now and have this omniscience to know what everyone thinks before you've asked them?

 

Naw. Its called a guess dipshit.

 

I think if for 1000-2000 yrs later, no God; people would be like they were at the time of Christ, not looking....Thats why I think the Book exists the way it is.

[Ouroboros]

I don't know? Why would they still be looking if the Book were more consistent? Are you claiming that it's perfect because it's imperfect? That it makes sense because it's bullshit? Why then didn't God make it a more consistent, coherent and non-contradictory bullshit? Or if the confusing, inconsistent, and non-coherent bullshit was the purpose, then why wasn't it even more chaotic? You say it's some kind of perfect mix of fiction, bullshit, stupid stuff and some pearls in the mud, that makes it work?

 

You do realize there are about the same amount of Muslims in the world as Christians, so can we use the same argument for the Quran?

[florduh]

Yo, the only reason you believe what you do is because of the accident of birth into a Western culture that holds the Bible, rather than the Koran or other holy book to be the True Word of God.

 

Your ONLY BASIS for belief is that book. Of course, people around the world and throughout history have had "ecstatic" experiences, revelations and hallucinations they attribute to their gods, but Christianity is derived SOLELY from the Bible.

 

And the book makes so little sense that its own faithful adherents can't agree if Jesus is God, if there is a literal hell, etc., etc. Yet, with all the confusion and factual misinformation the book offers, being at odds with science and history, people are willing to base their whole lives on it, to kill and die for it. All because of a highly flawed and derivative collection of writings that were hand-picked by a handful of politicians many, many years ago.

 

Sorry, that's just nuts.

[Abiyoyo]

I don't know? Why would they still be looking if the Book were more consistent? Are you claiming that it's perfect because it's imperfect? That it makes sense because it's bullshit? Why then didn't God make it a more consistent, coherent and non-contradictory bullshit? Or if the confusing, inconsistent, and non-coherent bullshit was the purpose, then why wasn't it even more chaotic? You say it's some kind of perfect mix of fiction, bullshit, stupid stuff and some pearls in the mud, that makes it work?

 

You do realize there are about the same amount of Muslims in the world as Christians, so can we use the same argument for the Quran?

 

No. I think the evolution by people fitting into their boundaries of thought and knowledge has created the confusion we have today. The Protestant movement started it majority, then it has escalated into what we have today. Even the RCC has evolved over the years, though they keep the most traditional in my opinion.

 

And I guess so Hans; about Islam, same difference.

[Spiderwire]

For the ten-thousandth time . . .

 

If there was an almighty god who wrote a book for his very own creations, WOULDN'T IT MAKE A LITTLE MORE SENSE AND NOT BE SO GODDAM SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND VAGUE?????

 

Sorry, sometimes my mind just gets boggled by the idiocy.

 

I say no. Question?

If God made himself known to about 2/3 of the earth right now; how many people do you guess would still be 100% firm in His belief 5000yrs later?

I think if for 1000-2000 yrs later, no God; people would be like they were at the time of Christ, not looking. Its not about Him, its about us. Thats why I think the Book exists the way it is.

 

If the God of the Bible, was indeed, real... and if he created each and every one of us... and if he loved us with a love that is eternal and that we cannot comprehend... and if believing in him and trusting in him and having a personal relationship with him would keep 2/3 of the earth right now out of the place he made for those who reject the notion of him... why wouldn't he make himself known? There are so many ways he could do it. Jeez. The internet, satellite radio, and cable television would get the news out quite well, wouldn't it? And why would he only make himself known to 2/3 of the folks on the planet? Why not everyone? Why wait for 5,000 years or 1,000 or 2,000 years to see if tales of the good ol' days were still being told? What would have been the problem with just making things clear back in the Bronze Age or the Iron Age? Why the game of hide and seek? If millions (billions?) are pouring into hell because he wants to play cat and mouse, isn't that repulsive at best?

 

Relax, though. There isn't any God so there's no need to get your panties in a knot about that concept or about any religious text that was written by who believed eating pork and shrimp was an abomination. And you're absolutely correct about one thing - it is about us. It's all about us.

[Abiyoyo]

Yo, the only reason you believe what you do is because of the accident of birth into a Western culture that holds the Bible, rather than the Koran or other holy book to be the True Word of God.

 

Your ONLY BASIS for belief is that book. Of course, people around the world and throughout history have had "ecstatic" experiences, revelations and hallucinations they attribute to their gods, but Christianity is derived SOLELY from the Bible.

 

I agree. Do you think you could practice atheism in the core of Islamic land? Doubt it. So, you as well believe what you believe because of your accidental birth into our same Western culture.

[Ouroboros]

No. I think the evolution by people fitting into their boundaries of thought and knowledge has created the confusion we have today. The Protestant movement started it majority, then it has escalated into what we have today. Even the RCC has evolved over the years, though they keep the most traditional in my opinion.

 

And I guess so Hans; about Islam, same difference.

I'm trying to understand your view; are you suggesting that God intentionally wanted religion to be changing, and a bit vague? Sounds like some form of mystery religion to me, where salvation is discovered through revelation, which is an experience rather than knowledge. Right? If that's what you think, my thought is that this is what Christianity was about in the beginning. Not a factual truth, or a historical truth, but experience the divine. And that could be done through meditation over the stories and in reality, the stories weren't true history, but were written intentionally as myths. This way people would "feel" God instead of "know" God. And you can see this is underpinning Christianity without anyone admitting it, and at the same time Christians work so hard to find arguments and proof for their belief, when that is not the real essence of the religion. It's not about stories being true, or Jesus really existing, but rather the experience of feeling a connection to the "divine" (or the universe) through those myths. Do you see the specific angle of this view?

[Abiyoyo]

If the God of the Bible, was indeed, real... and if he created each and every one of us... and if he loved us with a love that is eternal and that we cannot comprehend... and if believing in him and trusting in him and having a personal relationship with him would keep 2/3 of the earth right now out of the place he made for those who reject the notion of him... why wouldn't he make himself known? There are so many ways he could do it. Jeez. The internet, satellite radio, and cable television would get the news out quite well, wouldn't it? And why would he only make himself known to 2/3 of the folks on the planet? Why not everyone? Why wait for 5,000 years or 1,000 or 2,000 years to see if tales of the good ol' days were still being told? What would have been the problem with just making things clear back in the Bronze Age or the Iron Age? Why the game of hide and seek? If millions (billions?) are pouring into hell because he wants to play cat and mouse, isn't that repulsive at best?

 

Thats the point. He does. 2/3 of the Earth's population are either Christian or Islamic. Both based from the OT. As far as the division between Muslim and Christianity; its not yet come to pass. Jesus said to preach His message to all nations. People are still doing that; even in countries were the story of Jesus is blasphemy, to Muslim. My opinion- If a child is born Muslim, lives Muslim, and dies Muslim, never hearing the Christian Gospels, then I would hope God wouldn't condemn them. But the fact is, Christianity is acknowledged throughout Islamic practice. Either hated, despised, or just there. It is existent there. Especially now days. Want to know why?

The internet, satellite radio, and cable television would get the news out quite well.

 

 

Relax, though. There isn't any God so there's no need to get your panties in a knot about that concept or about any religious text that was written by who believed eating pork and shrimp was an abomination. And you're absolutely correct about one thing - it is about us. It's all about us.

 

[Ouroboros]

I agree. Do you think you could practice atheism in the core of Islamic land? Doubt it. So, you as well believe what you believe because of your accidental birth into our same Western culture.

Actually I think atheism is more accepted by Muslims than they accept Christianity, and if I understand it right, their argument is that a Christian is farther away from being converted than an atheist. An atheist is basically already half-way to become a Muslim.

[florduh]

Yoyo,

 

One does not "practice" atheism. Atheism is simply the lack of belief in gods. Anyone anywhere who can think and read can disbelieve their society's gods and any others that don't provide any evidence of their existence.

 

If you agree that your Christianity is merely an accident of where you happened to grow up, how can you assign any validity and ultimate truth to it? Your response implies that you think everyone should adopt the religion or god of their dominant society.